Retracted Publications in Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery: What Mistakes Are Being Made?

Abstract

AbstractObjectivesRetraction of publications is critical to maintaining scientific integrity, yet there is a lack of research on its occurrence in Otolaryngology. This study investigates characteristics, trends, and reasons for retraction of publications in otolaryngology journals.Study DesignBibliometric analysis.SettingPubMed, Scopus, Web of Science.MethodsA PubMed search for publications retracted during 1990 to 2022 from the top 60 journals with the subject “Otorhinolaryngology” using Scopus' CiteScore was performed. Publications were excluded if they were not in English, had missing information or did not have available abstracts or full‐text. Publication and retraction dates, journal, country of origin, citation counts, journal impact factor (JIF), topic, and reason for retraction were recorded. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to identify potential associations in the data.ResultsFifty‐three publications were included. The 2020s had the highest number of retractions per year (4.33), with publications being retracted on average, 35 months after initial publication. The most common retracted topic and country of origin were head and neck (26.4%) and China (17.0%), respectively. Most publications were retracted because of plagiarism or duplicate publication (52.8%). Mean citation count was 6.92 ± 8.32 and mean JIF was 2.80 ± 1.35. Citation count was positively associated with months until retraction (r = .432, P = .001). There was no significant correlation between months to retraction and JIF (r = .022, P = .878).ConclusionThe most cited reasons for retraction were plagiarism and duplicate publication. An understanding of the reasons for retraction can better position journals to enforce more meticulous review standards and reduce such publications from being published.Level of EvidenceLevel 4.